TLS Website

Good idea. Did you only play in Montgomery County? I've found many (most?) in the MD/DC/VA vicinity play in multiple areas and so the limitation of TLS doing separate ratings in each area is significant and may skew your analysis.

Click to expand...

Yes, only Montgomery County. And everything I said in my post applies only to the Montgomery Co. TLS ratings.

Yes, I can see that. Is that analysis for the whole US? Is it meant to mimic USTA's NTRP system?

E-mail me (computerratings@techrunning.com) who this is, TLS may be way off on this player, but my ratings have correctly explained other strange bump ups/DQs like this and I'd like to check what I have for the player.

Click to expand...

I will, as soon as I post this.

I don't believe this is an accurate, at least the implication that you can't reasonably get bumped up by playing at level. Does playing up give greater opportunity to get bumped up? Sure, and if that is all you do and the better opponents gift you games, your rating may be higher than it should be, but this is probably not a common case.

Click to expand...

I didn't conclude that it's impossible to get bumped up by playing at level (keep in mind that my conclusion pertained only to TLS ratings, which may not be an accurate estimate of NTRP ratings). What I did say was that it appears that it is far easier to obtain an outlier high TLS rating by playing up a small number of matches than it is by playing at level a great number of matches.

I noted that 14 out of the highest 15 rated players in the high normal range (3.31-3.38 ) had all played a lot of matches at level, had excellent W-L records, and were in my opinion among the most likely to get bumped up prior to seeing the TLS ratings. In contrast, the lowest 6 of the 9 players in the high outlier range (3.46-3.53) had all played very few matches, had played only at the 4.0 level, and their combined W-L record (W-L game record) was very poor (4-27), even considering that they were playing up.

In summary, I believe that the computer expectation of, for example, a team of 3.75 players beating a team of 3.25 players by 6-0, 6-0 is unrealistic and biased towards helping the lower rated players. It is impossible for them to fall below the computer expectations in such a match. In contrast, there are many things that could cause them to exceed such low expectations, including having an especially good match, an injury on the other team, the other team having an off day, the other team being low on adrenaline due to the lack of competition, a few lucky bounces, or invalid ratings.

Is that analysis for the whole US? Is it meant to mimic USTA's NTRP system?

Click to expand...

Yes, it includes players from across the whole U.S., although I've done analysis of more players in some sections than others. And yes, my Estimated Dynamic NTRP is meant to replicate the USTA's NTRP system and (IMHO) does it very accurately.

And thanks for e-mailing me. I did take a look at the 0-2 player you mentioned and my numbers don't have his rating above 3.5 so wouldn't expect him to be bumped. However, there are a few observations.

While he went 0-2 and only won 7 games, he was playing in an 8.0C league and doing so with another 3.5 as his partner. In both matches they played two 4.0s so they are expected to lose pretty badly and going 0-2, even winning just 7 games was pretty close to the expected result.

But, having played only 2 matches, I don't believe his 2013 year-end rating will change from 3.5 as you need to play at least 3 matches to have a year-end rating calculated. So I wouldn't expect him to be bumped for this reason too.

One thing that struck me looking at the TLS detailed stats is how hard it can be for a player to get bumped up without playing up. I looked at a bunch of players who I believe are at the top of their rating category (i.e. very good 3.5s) and it was surprisingly difficult for them to get a high DNTRP when playing at their level. When they played up, their DNTRP level was MUCH higher than when playing at level. The dampening effect of playing lower rated players is profound.

One thing that struck me looking at the TLS detailed stats is how hard it can be for a player to get bumped up without playing up. I looked at a bunch of players who I believe are at the top of their rating category (i.e. very good 3.5s) and it was surprisingly difficult for them to get a high DNTRP when playing at their level. When they played up, their DNTRP level was MUCH higher than when playing at level. The dampening effect of playing lower rated players is profound.

Click to expand...

Yes, playing up gives more opportunity to improve your rating, and because of some of the factors discussed here doing so may result in a player being bumped up that shouldn't. The key thing is "leaked" games.

Let's take a hypothetical player right at 4.0 or so and the theoretical 6-0,6-0 is expected between players exactly 1 level apart. Against an average 4.0 (rating 3.75) he should win 6-3,6-3 and against an average 4.5 (4.25) he should lose 6-3,6-3. Against the 4.0, if he "leaks" any games and it gets closer, his rating goes down. Against the 4.5 if his opponent "leaks" any games and it gets closer, his rating goes up.

Something I haven't done but will put on my list is some analysis of players that play up and how different their match ratings are for their matches at the different levels. Look for something soon.

That just shows that TLS are estimates. Supposedly if you are .05 away from the lower level an auto appeal is granted. The 4.02 guy is actually higher than 4.05, but he he likely is very close.

Click to expand...

Does anyone know why auto appeals are granted? What is the reasoning behind this? Doesn't the USTA "trust" their early start and end of year ratings? Doesn't this just fall into the hands of the sandbaggers who prefer to win than play at their actual level?

Does anyone know why auto appeals are granted? What is the reasoning behind this? Doesn't the USTA "trust" their early start and end of year ratings? Doesn't this just fall into the hands of the sandbaggers who prefer to win than play at their actual level?

Click to expand...

Any rating system is going to have some margin of error and I think the USTA is simply allowing for that and players that think they will be overwhelmed at the next level up to appeal down if they are within the 0.05 tolerance (0.1 for those 60 or older).

Does this provide a loophole for sandbaggers? Probably, but there are some controls in place to avoid that, namely that benchmark players can't auto-appeal, and if you've played more than 5 matches you also can't appeal. This makes the auto-appeal available only to a subset of the players that haven't played that much and perhaps have a case that they got bumped up due to a fluke match or two.

Any rating system is going to have some margin of error and I think the USTA is simply allowing for that and players that think they will be overwhelmed at the next level up to appeal down if they are within the 0.05 tolerance (0.1 for those 60 or older).

Does this provide a loophole for sandbaggers? Probably, but there are some controls in place to avoid that, namely that benchmark players can't auto-appeal, and if you've played more than 5 matches you also can't appeal. This makes the auto-appeal available only to a subset of the players that haven't played that much and perhaps have a case that they got bumped up due to a fluke match or two.

Click to expand...

The big one is that A rated players are subject to 3 strike DQ like S rated players, so if you really are supposed to be at the next level and you appeal down, theoretically, you'll be DQd anyway. They are definitely recognizing that a step function representing a continuous distribution in a population is going to be inaccurate at the step boundaries and allowing those people to appeal and play down if they are in fact right at the edge, but with the risk of DQ if they are doing it knowing that they should be playing up.

Looking at the ratings for our area, they seem to quite accurately reflect the results from league matches. There are people rated above me I can beat, and people below me that can beat me. However, these ratings are not a definition of your level of play, they are a representation of your results from league play. And viewing it as such, it strikes me as being very spot on.